Following the discovery of the dead bodies of the Cotswold florist Jude Richmond and of her nine-year-old daughter Millie in a flooded gravel-pit, ‘The Daily Telegraph’ reported: "Gloucestershire police have ruled out foul play, so two possibilities remain: accident, or suicide and infanticide."
It had never really occurred to me before that the triumph of the only-women-bleed mentality had advanced so far that a woman killing her nine-yearold daughter would not be considered “foul play”. Moreover, it certainly was not infanticide, for a girl of that age is not an infant: no, the poor little thing would have been fully aware of the horrors befalling her.
Now, I know few of the details of this tragedy, and if the woman killed her daughter, and then took her own life, she was probably deeply disturbed. But she did kill her own daughter. This is not merely foul play. It is murder. And it is not good enough to say, as the ‘Telegraph’ did: “What happened... may never be known for certain. But what is clear is that Mrs Richmond never stopped loving her little mascot.”
So, the real issue here is journalism, and the cultural values it now embodies. After a generation of a widespread feminist indoctrination, it is pretty much the consensus that if a woman does a violent crime, extraneous circumstances may be automatically invoked to explain or even justify it. Take the foregoing case: can you imagine any newspaper saying of the killing of a little girl, with the father the only likely culprit, that “foul play was not suspected”? Or that, though the truth may never be known for certain, the father “never stopped loving his little mascot” (presumably, even as he held her bubbling face underwater till she died). We know that his mental state would never be presumed to be a reason why “foul play had not occurred”. He’s a man. Why would anyone come to such conclusions?
If you can bear to do it, take a stiff whiskey and do an internet- browse through the various colleges and universities, looking at the “ethical” courses available: equality studies, feminist studies, multicultural studies, yes, even queer studies. No Christianity studies, of course, or conservative studies, or traditionalist studies; no, no no, universities and colleges are centres of progress! They look forward, not backward to the dark and terrible days of yesterday!
And the culture of enlightened progressivism is never as intense as in the media courses which have now established a virtual monopoly on the production of journalists. Naturally, every journalism course has modules on multiculturalism, feminism, gay rights, equality, and the evils of imperialism: but if any has one on modern theology, or the influence of Christian thinking on the modern world, it has escaped my attention.
The resulting journalistic culture is highly selective in nature, even when free speech is still generally recognised as a right, and is protected accordingly. So the simplest thing for this culture to do with an opinion it doesn’t like is to ignore it, and it will go away – which is indeed the normal fate of out-of-step, dissentient opinions in Ireland.
The alternative is to marginalise them with ridicule. For example, I cannot count the number of times have I seen feminist columnists torpedo an argument they didn’t like from a man with the H-word, as follows.
Take any line from what I have written above, and put, “he harrumphed” at the end of it: as in, “‘For the real issue here is journalism, and the cultural values which are embedded in it,’ he harrumphed.” Instantly, the words become the ridiculous meanderings of a doddery, ‘hang-’em & flog ’em’ old clubman standing at the drawingroom fender, a glass of port in his hand.
THE H-word is the ultimate in rhetorical smart weaponry: it always destroys its target, regardless of the sentiment expressed. Thus, “‘The workers are the slaves of the world,” harrumphed James Connolly, “and their wives are the slaves of the slaves’.”
The true triumph of a culture occurs when nobody notices that its values have become working norms. And in our present monocultural climate (for so-called “multiculturalism” always results in the imposition of the dogmas of a single-culture, pseudo-liberalism) the most important single building is the RTE canteen. That is where the national broadcasters’ programme-makers – the producers and researchers who are mostly products of the past 20 years of media courses – impose the liberal agenda, firstly on one another, and later on the airwaves, and without consciously intending to do so. It is to the idle clink of coffee spoons that the Irish media consensus is subconsciously agreed, just as it is in the BBC, and in media outlets everywhere.
Which is how a newspaper report of what seems to have been the deliberate drowning of a nine-year-old girl by a 41-yearold- woman could have declared that there was no “foul play”. That was written by one journalist, read by his sub-editor, approved by the features editor, and then presumably by the assistant editor and/or the editor himself. And nobody noticed anything wrong.
Terrifying: absolutely bloody terrifying.